1. On December 9, 2016, the disposition that the Defendant rendered to the Plaintiff on December 9, 2016 as bereaved family benefits and funeral site pay shall be revoked.

2. The costs of lawsuit shall be.

1. Details of the disposition;

A. D around September 29, 2016, around 2012:35, D died at around 20:41 on the same day on the same day.

B. On November 15, 2016, the Plaintiff asserted that it is a de facto marriage spouse who was living together with the network D and claimed that the Defendant pay bereaved family benefits and funeral expenses under the Industrial Accident Compensation Insurance Act.

C. Meanwhile, on November 16, 2016, the Defendant’s Intervenor, who is the deceased D’s child, also claimed that the Defendant pay bereaved family benefits and funeral expenses under the Industrial Accident Compensation Insurance Act.

On December 9, 2016, the Defendant rendered a disposition not paying bereaved family benefits and funeral expenses to the Plaintiff on the ground that the Plaintiff and the deceased D did not have a de facto marital relationship (hereinafter “instant site pay disposition”), and paid the bereaved family benefits to the Intervenor.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1, 8, 9, Eul evidence Nos. 1 through 4, 7, 13 (including branch numbers; hereinafter the same shall apply) and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The parties' assertion

A. The plaintiff asserted that the plaintiff was a spouse in a de facto marital relationship with the deceased D and was living together with his own income at the time of the deceased D's death, and therefore, the plaintiff is entitled to bereaved family's benefits under the Industrial Accident Compensation Insurance Act.

Therefore, the site pay disposition of this case must be revoked illegally.

B. The Defendant’s assertion cannot be deemed to have been in a de facto marital relationship with the network D, and even if a de facto marital relationship had been in a de facto marital relationship with E, the Plaintiff does not constitute a person entitled to bereaved family benefits under the Industrial Accident Compensation Insurance Act.

Therefore, the instant land payment disposition is lawful.

3. Determination as to the legitimacy of the site pay disposition of this case

A. On June 12, 1985, the Plaintiff completed his/her marriage report with E on June 12, 1985, and the Plaintiff was tried by means of service by public notice on March 22, 2017.